IRM’s digital ethics guidelines

IRM’s digital ethics guidelines

Risk managers play a critical role in ensuring that digital technologies are implemented ethically. That requires thinking beyond compliance and ensuring that risk managers are guided by their moral compasses, says IRM Digital Ethics Guidelines. “As risk professionals, we have a duty to ensure that new technologies are developed and used in ways that will…

Risk managers play a critical role in ensuring that digital technologies are implemented ethically. That requires thinking beyond compliance and ensuring that risk managers are guided by their moral compasses, says IRM Digital Ethics Guidelines.

“As risk professionals, we have a duty to ensure that new technologies are developed and used in ways that will do the minimum amount of harm while striking a balance with the opportunities for our organisations and communities,” says IRM chair Iain Wright (CIRM).

This balancing act can involve ethical dilemmas that do not have simple answers. But the issues involved often do not require in-depth knowledge of the technologies involved. “This digital ethics guideline has been created for the risk professional audience without expecting an in-depth knowledge of modern technology,” Wright says.

Core principles

The guidelines set out three core principles:

  • If something should not be done in the physical world, it should not be done in the digital world.
  • Data should be secured to ensure that it is complete, correct, consistent, and current as far as reasonably practicable.
  • Data sources and resulting outputs should be confirmed as free from bias as far as reasonably practicable.

In fact, risk managers can refer to IRM’s code of conduct where there are checklists to help people think through complex issues.

Basic tests

In addition, the guidance says that there are four basic tests that could be helpful in applying the ethical principles:

  • Accountability: Are appropriate and effective governance and oversight mechanisms in place to safeguard all potential stakeholders in the technology?
  • Fairness: Could the technology discriminate, either intentionally or inadvertently, against individuals or social groups?
  • Transparency: Would the technology’s actions and processes be straightforward for a knowledgeable human to understand?
  • Sustainability: Are the real-world consequences of the technology on individuals and society understood?

The publication is authorised by the Professional Standards Committee on behalf of IRM. It was developed by Mark Turner.

The guidance is available for free here.

 





← Previous

Supply chain disruptions rise
The number of businesses experiencing ten or more supply chain disruptions rose in from 4.8…






Next →

Risk, resilience and recovery, IRM chair Iain Wright, CRIM
  Covid-19 has shown the importance of running effective, efficient and flexible business operations and…

14 OCTOBER 2026

AI Transforming Enterprise Risk Management Activities

Risk management has changed considerably over the years, with new frameworks, standards and expectations shaping the way organisations manage risk. However, many of the day-to-day activities within Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) functions have remained much the same.

Find out more

22 OCTOBER 2026

Building safe agents

Hosted by Adam Grainger and Adam David, discover the foundations (training data), move through adversarial testing (red teaming), and end with operational resilience (incident management).

Find out more

16 NOVEMBER 2026

IRM Student Webinar

This session is suitable for anyone considering an IRM qualification, whether you are exploring IRM’s International Certificates or the newly launched IRM Awards.

The webinar will be particularly relevant to professionals working directly in risk management, those with risk responsibilities as part of a wider role, and individuals looking to build, refresh or expand their knowledge of risk management.

Find out more

Advertisement